Please log in

or

Register now for free

or

Choose your profile *

Email *

A valid e-mail address. All e-mails from the system will be sent to this address. The e-mail address is not made public and will only be used if you wish to receive a new password or wish to receive certain news or notifications by e-mail.

Password

Username *

Newsletters

Higher education updates from the THE editorial team

World University Rankings news

If you do not wish to be contacted about offers, products or services from THE/TES Global then please check this box

Harvard University does not feature in the elite top 10, lying just outside in 11th place, while the University of Cambridge’s tally of one Nobel prize this century is not enough to make the top 10. The University of Oxford fails to feature in the list, having produced no Nobel prizewinners this century.

The institutional list, covering Nobel prizes awarded from 2000 to 2014, was produced by giving each university a score based on the number of winners affiliated with the institution at the time their award was granted. The score was then weighted based on the number of prizewinners for the category and the number of institutions affiliated with each award winner. Literature and peace prizewinners were excluded from the analysis.

Henry Yang, chancellor of the University of California, Santa Barbara, the seventh institution on the institutional list, said that its success is down to its focus on “developing an intellectual environment that nurtures collegial partnerships”.

Christina Beck, head of communication at the Max Planck Society, said it “attempts to identify those high-potential scientists who dare to take on completely new approaches and unusual ideas regarding scientific problems. High risk and high trust are our core principles.”

The US tops the table based on the nationality of Nobel prizewinners this century – also produced using a weighted score according to how many winners there were for each prize – accounting for nearly half (71) of the 146 laureates.

The US’ “golden year” was 2006 – the only year since the start of the century where all the prizewinners were from one country and affiliated with that country’s institutions.

Despite the UK missing out on the top 10 table for institutions, it is in second place when it comes to the number of prizewinners by nationality, receiving an overall score of six from a total of 12 prizes this century.

Australia is the only country to win more than one Nobel prize whose winners have received all of their awards in the same field: physiology or medicine.

“While many in East Asia have benefited from generous funding in recent decades and exciting reforms which have seen them march up the World University Rankings, there is a remaining challenge around nurturing the creativity, the freedom and the often rather maverick thinking that can lead to the most groundbreaking scientific discoveries,” he added.

“But the UK should also take this as a warning sign – is the uniquely pressurised atmosphere created by a series of funding cuts and a growing culture of short-termism and target-setting taking its toll on our academics’ ability to truly find the space to think big?”

The THE World Academic Summit, which is being held at the University of Melbourne from 30 September to 2 October, will include a session on nurturing the next generation of Nobel prizewinners, and will hear from internationally acclaimed laureate Brian Schmidt, as well as Nicholas Dirks, chancellor of the third highest institution in the list, the University of California, Berkeley.

Related universities

POSTSCRIPT:

Reader's comments (6)

The last table does not seem to be correct. Canada should be on that list.
There were a total of 3 Nobel Winners (excl Lit and Peace) from Canada between 2000-2014.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates_by_country#Canada

Would the table be different if prize winners were ranked on the basis of place of birth, or their undergraduate university. These table could merely be an indication as to which university can buy the best academics - a bit like football perhaps?

It seems to me that 14 years is far too short a sample period to discern any real trends in international data, especially as Nobel prizes are often awarded many years after the discoveries. In any case, focusing on Noblel awards - and ignoring all others - is a rather simplistic barometer to use in the measurement of outstanding work, given that many Nobel Prizes are not awarded in many fields such as mathematics or engineering

are prizes/accolades the right measure(s) of success or its high time that we rank the institutions that have helped maximize alleviation of human suffering, poverty and teaching good citizenship? it's time that our educational institutions focus on building good citizenry rather than in the rat race of winning awards. thank you. binay panda

This emphasizes how prejudiced most university rankings are. Harvard is not even on the list, and Technion with the 8th place on the Nobel list is ranked lower than 200 by THE. Maybe THE people (and others) should stop and think for a moment if it is the right thing they are ranking, And maybe, just maybe .. there is also some politics involved?